ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00014296
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A Parking Enforcement Officer | A Parking Company |
Representatives | No Appearance by or on behalf of the Complainant | No Appearance by or on behalf of the Respondent |
Complaint:
Act | Complaint Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Regulation 10 of the European Communities (Protection of Employees on Transfer of Undertakings) Regulations 2003 (S.I. No. 131 of 2003) | CA-00018514-001 | 15/04/2018 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 20/09/2018
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Patsy Doyle
Procedure:
In accordance with Regulation 10 of the EC (Protection of Employees on Transfer of Undertakings) Regulations 2003, Statutory Instrument No 131/2003, following the referral of the complaint to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint.
Background:
On 15 April 2018, the complainant submitted a complaint to the WRC which outlined that his terms and conditions terms had not transferred from his previous employer. He described himself as a Lay litigant and did not indicate that he had any difficulty with the pro offered date of hearing scheduled for September 20, 2018. Neither complainant or respondent was present on the day of hearing. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
On 15 April 2018, the complainant by way of written submission outlined that his rate of pay had been changed without his consent, he was not in receipt of his contractual hours and “he was out of pocket due to changes which have been made by the new company”. He submitted that he had worked for the Respondent from February 26 ,2018. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent did not attend the hearing. On July 2, 2018, the Respondent sought an adjournment to facilitate witness attendance at the hearing. This was facilitated. On September 14, 2018, the Respondent contacted the WRC to indicate that the complainant had confirmed to his employer that he had withdrawn his claim before the WRC. The Respondent was duly advised that without reception of a withdrawal initiated by the complainant himself, the case would run as planned on September 20, 2018. There was no appearance by the Respondent at hearing. |
Findings and Conclusions:
I am satisfied that both parties were correctly on notice of the hearing on September 20, 2018. I had not received any notice of withdrawal in advance of the hearing. I permitted time for the parties to make a delayed attendance. I did not receive any explanation for either party’s non- attendance. I have found that the claim lodged under Regulation 10, SI 131/2003 is not well founded and has failed for want of prosecution. |
Decision:Regulation 10 of the European Communities (Protection of Employees on Transfer of Undertakings) Regulations, 2003 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions contained in Section 10 (5) of the Regulations.
I have found that the complaint is not well founded and falls for want of prosecution.
|
Dated: 11th October 2018
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Patsy Doyle
Key Words:
Transfer of Undertakings (TUPE) |